iPhone Doesn't Surf Fast Enough for Jobs 436
ElvaWSJ writes with a link to a Wall Street Journal interview with Steve Jobs and AT&T's CEO Randall Stephenson. As you can imagine, they're pretty enthusiastic. Just the same, they address the possibility that the iPhone will slow internet access on Ma Bell's cell network. "Mr. Jobs acknowledged that the company's new iPhone won't surf the Internet as fast as he would like on the network, called "Edge," but added that the device's ability to connect to Wi-Fi hotspots would give consumers a speedier alternative for Web browsing. For his part, Mr. Stephenson said the iPhone represents a broader push by AT&T into Wi-Fi services, including, potentially, mobile Internet calling. The two men also discussed the iPod's "halo effect" and reflected on the origins of their corporate partnership."
Not much choice (Score:5, Interesting)
ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd rather have more power consumption to download something in two seconds than less power consumption to download it in 10. The battery life may be somewhat less but if you can get the same amount of web browsing done in less time, what's the loss?
Sorry, I prefer speed at the expense of battery life. That and no tethering makes the iPhone less than useful for me.
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:5, Insightful)
No it doesn't. I for one find it unacceptable to have to plug in my cell phone in the middle of the day. It's why I've opted for smart phones with fantastic battery life (Sony P800 and currently the Nokia e61). Until they announced the new battery life figures for the iPhone it was a non-starter for me, regardless of how cool it may be. There are plenty of times when I'm not near a power outlet, and since I'm on-call 24/7 there are also plenty of times when I don't want to be tethered to a power outlet. Long battery life means I can go where I want and do what I want without concern about the phone dying. I plug it in while I sleep and the next day it's ready to go all day again.
I've been to trade shows with people running around looking for power outlets so they can charge their phones. Tethered to one place for an hour or two at a time. Sorry, I've got places to go and things to do.
Is edge slow compared to 3G? Sure, it's what I had on the P800 and it's what I have on the e61 (T-Mobile doesn't do 3G). You know what? It's fast enough for email and web surfing is tolerable. I'm not downloading Gigabytes of data because IT'S A FREAKIN' PHONE! Is 3G faster? No doubt. But for email and web surfing edge is actually just fine. If I need faster access then most likely I also need the processing power in my laptop, not a phone. For those occasions I'm after a wi-fi hotspot anyway.
Having said all that, if the iPhone was 3G would it be better? Of course. But is 3G the "requirement" every seems to think? Hardly. Of course I'm also a weirdo who thinks the lack of flash support in Safari on the iPhone is actually a blessing.
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:4, Insightful)
For a device that is clearly going to be bandwidth hungry to be useful as more than a pretty phone it needs 3G. If Wifi is available and you want to stick around a hotspot you might as well take out your notebook, if you're not buying it for the internet capabilities why not just get a plain phone?
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:5, Insightful)
Every single person you're talking to, for starters. Haven't you just described the whole freakin' tech industry?
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:4, Insightful)
2.) Waiting for the next iPhone means waiting an unknown length of time. It could be years.
3.) The contract doesn't say you have to use the same phone for two years. If a better one comes out, you can switch.
4.) Many people are more interested with having constant access to things like email, which doesn't need 3G speeds.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Carrying and extra battery means you need a separate charging station for the battery. Get one for your car. If you don't have one for your car, that's fine. Two batteries should last you more than enough time to get back to your place at night (or hotel room, wherever) and put the extra battery in the charging station and plug in your phone. Wake up, have two fresh
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, TFA also says there are issues with 3G chips, including power consumption AND physical size. There's a limit to the numbr of discreet chips you can cram into a device before you also start having to increase the form factor. More power hungry chips means a bigger battery to get to the same life, which also translates into a larger form factor.
Yes, you could probably add in 3G and GPS and an 80B drive and tethering and all of the other "missing" features that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, you're made up numbers are not in your favor...
So for two minutes on edge, by your example, I use 2 watts.
Re:ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices (Score:4, Interesting)
I think you just answered your own question... Really, the unlimited plan is limited by how much data you'd actually use on your phone, which is a lot less than you can with your laptop. The phone itself isn't going to transfer much data, because other than YouTube, it can't make use of large amounts of data (unless they start allowing people to buy from the iTunes store directly on the phone). Your laptop is where you could start downloading large files and doing a lot of other communication. That eases the strain on their network, but they still get to call your data plan unlimited.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
GSM spec for 4 timeslots (the almost universal configuration, and the only feasible "real world" configuration, maxes at 236.4kbps. With 8 timeslots the theoretical max is 473.6kbps.
So if you'd been sold on "EDGE is 300-700kbps", you'd be looking at a pretty clear case of deceptive advertising.
EDGE is a slow network. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:5, Interesting)
Here are some number from the UK Vodafone GPRS (non-Edge) network collected on a typical Cambridge to London Commute:
1. Business commuter trains (starting time) 7:15-8:45 and 17:15-18:45 97% downlink packet loss, totally unuseable. Looks like the BB is actually prioritised versus any other traffic to ensure that the people who enjoy a vibrator up their crotch have an instant vibration regularly.
2. Transition period: 8:45-9:15 and 16:15-17:15 - works in some areas depending on cell capacity
3. Non-business commuter trains 9:15-15:45 and after 19:15 - works flawlessly except a couple of holes in coverage. Speed is not great, but quite tolerable. Definitely useable for some minor surfing, checking mail, working on a couple of documents.
I would not expect ATT to be much different. In fact, it is likely to be worse. With or without Edge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think prioritizing the blackberry, or at least text, isn't such a horrible idea. 1 jpg = 50 emails. Remember before video, before audio, it was static images that were going to come along and create the great "world wide wait." I guess long-range wireless is still at that point. Better to grant 50 people email access than
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:5, Funny)
But what if one of those 50 people is a...TERRORIST!?!?!
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:5, Informative)
The reason I switched from T-Mobile to Cingular was the data speed. T-Mobile clocked in around 40kbps average, where Cingular/AT&T was 160kbps.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hopefully, AT&T will get a massive deployment of picocells in areas with extra need going to ease the network burden. Apparently AT&T has done a lot to open up extra slots on their EDGE network that
Wrong! (Score:5, Interesting)
The US is 3G ready - it's Cingular/AT&T and T-Mobile who aren't.
Re:Map mixes Edge and 3G (Score:5, Insightful)
So the progression is something like this:
2G -> 2.5G -> 3G -> 3.5G -> 4G
GSM -> Edge -> W-CDMA(UMTS) -> HSPA -> LTE
cdmaOne -> 1xRTT -> EVDO -> EVDO Rev A -> UMB/OFDMA/WiMAX
Sprint has already rolled out EVDO Rev. A in some locations, which is "bitchin fast" for both download and upload.
I've had an EVDO Rev. 0 card in my laptop for a few years, and while I wouldn't say it is quite as fast as WiFi, it is really great and I get 5 hours of battery life.
In conclusion, your statement that the country is "EDGE ready, not 3G" is inaccurate in several ways. Not meaning to flame.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:EDGE is a slow network. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Correction (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple yanked all of the Flash from its corporate website and redid it all in standard Ajax using scriptilicious and other plane jane tools, demonstrating that anyone can. It's even more interactive and functional (check out Apple.com search) and no proprietary plugin for Flash required.
Adobe isn't happy about it, but do we really need to convert the web from open HTML into closed FLA? Apple even convinced Google to start putting all of its FLA On2 videos on YouTube into standard H.264. That makes is much easier to deliver standards-based hardware acceleration for mobile devices that optimizes YouTube type sites.
With this kind of progress, the web is headed back into open territory after a long captivity in proprietary hell. That's good for Linux users, DIY site builders, and levels the playing field in hardware.
The web shouldn't be hostage to anyone's plugin just to render pages, particularly a plugin tied to a proprietary and industrially uncommon video codec that doesn't appear to have any hardware acceleration features. Anyone can license H.264 or get cheap dedicated processors.
Internet Explorer on the desktop PC doesn't make any attempt to support CSS3, and doesn't even try hard to do 2005-era CSS. The Pocket version is even further away from being remotely useful for the modern web.
Not fast enough?!?! (Score:5, Funny)
I didn't get far... (Score:2, Funny)
One of the things we feel is this is the biggest breakthrough in user interfaces in 23 years. Since the Mac in 1984 brought us the mouse and bit map displays and folders and icons
hmmm...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
GEM was a copy of the Mac (or at least the Lisa), from this article [wikipedia.org]:
A new module, GEM AES (Application Environment Services), provided the window management and UI elements, and GEM Desktop used both to provide a Mac-like GUI. The 8086 version of the entire system was first demoed at the 1984 COMDEX [1], and shipped as GEM/1 on 28 February 1985 [2]. ...
At this point Apple Computer sued DRI in what would turn into a long dispute over the "look and feel" of the GEM/1 system, which was in fact an almost direct copy of the Macintosh (with some elements bearing a closer resemblance to those in the earlier Lisa). This eventually led to DRI being forced to change several basic features of the system. Apple would later go on to sue other companies for similar issues.
Re:I didn't get far... (Score:5, Insightful)
There were several little incubator projects or outright commercial failures for GUI's in the early 80's. Macintosh was the one that brought it to the world. They are the ones that got it right. That gives them some pretty significant bragging rights.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I won't make any apologies for Job's well known asshole tendencies (but supposedly those are much more subdued since NeXT, guess winning does fix everything?) but all he is doing here is stating what really happened. Were the primitives and direct inspiration for the Mac gui borrowed from Xerox? Damn straight. They borrowed from other places too, but they had the foresight to slap it all together and shove it out to the masses. This is how humanity works people, we build on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you pay close attention to Job's words he actually doesn't take credit for anything that Apple didn't do. Anything they co-opt and bring to market is always a "we" or an "us".
That's it, I hate it when people say stuff like that. If you read it carefully, sure he doesn't claim anything, but to most people it will read it as Apple invented all the stuff he listed.
Re: (Score:2)
-sigh- (Score:2, Insightful)
Nice to see Apple continuing the fine corporate tradition ov copying other people's innovations and claiming them as their own.
They didn't say they invented it (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:-sigh- (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
What better advertising for the iPhone could there be than Apple's CEO complaining that the data rate is too slow?
my fears have been relived...
I'm sorry you even had to live them once, much less twice.
Heresy (Score:2)
Or has Jobs put his finger on the real difference between Apple and Microsoft?
WiFi (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:WiFi (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd say its AT&T protecting itself when problems start to crop up with their data network.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WiFi (Score:5, Interesting)
See http://theonlyphoneyouneed.com/ [theonlyphoneyouneed.com]
I find the lock-in with a provider retarted. (Score:5, Interesting)
that way you could get your choice of service, your phone is not held hostage by unscrupulous Service providers, and it would have forced a change in the way cellular companies abuse their customers.
a win,win,win situation.
Because (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, if the iPhone does become the next iPod, then other carriers will start to make changes to support those features. Then APple will open it to other carriers.
This is very Jobs. Get his foot in the door, then eventually be the hippest cat in the whole room.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple could develop their own servi
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I find the lock-in with a provider retarted. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is NOT your friend, and they are NOT trying to bring about a revolution for the little guy. They are trying to worm their way in to every possible aspect of getting your money. Why do you HAVE to go thru iTunes to set a ring tone? Why can't you just use an existing MP3 that you downloaded/copied over to the phone? Because Apple doesn't get a cut that way.
The phone is not unlocked because Apple gets a cut of the service from AT&T. The phone will most likely only be unlocked when Apple negotiates a cut from the other GSM service providers.
Re:I find the lock-in with a provider retarted. (Score:5, Funny)
The most they can you say?
Well this is an unsettling development.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not criticizing. I'm just trying to point it out to some people who think Apple is their benevolent buddy, and are doing this for the greater benefit of humanity. Steve Job, and Apple by proxy, is a control freak extraordinaire.
Re:I find the lock-in with a provider retarted. (Score:5, Funny)
And it was tasty and refreshing, thank you very much.
The reason I want an iPhone is because I've been extremely happy with every Apple product I've ever bought. They want to provide me with a service I desire for a price I find appropriate? Oh, that tricksy Jobs! He's got me again!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Okay, so we know that Apple is in fact a for-profit company seeking, well, profit... but what does that have to do with iTunes and ringtones? Last I checked, iTunes is not exclusively for purchased music, in fact the vast majority of everyone's iTunes library is not in fact purchased from iTunes.
So forcing the user to go through iTunes is in fact *not* a form of lock-in, since that mp3 I put on my phone as ringtone could have come from ANYWHERE I wanted. If Apple starts implementing a "only purchased music
Ignore what it is, think of what it could be! (Score:5, Funny)
Ringtone business gets a tease:
Mr. Jobs: One might imagine a lot of things down the road.
Mr. Jobs: There's a lot of things you can imagine down the road.
But you can forget 3G in revision one:
Mr. Jobs: No, we just don't comment on future stuff.
I also got a kick out of this:
Mr. Jobs: There's often times a Wi-Fi network that you can join whether you're sitting in a coffee shop or even walking along the street piggybacking on somebody's home Wi-Fi network.
Theft of service, it's the Apple way!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
When I moved into my new flat, I used an open Wi-Fi network I found. When I got my own a few days later, I left it open so others in a similar situation could use it. I don't mind you using my Wi-Fi network as long as you don't destroy my bandwith.
Does it autoconnect or manual to wifi (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Server Side Compression? (Score:2)
How about some plugins to block graphical advertisements or other unwanted content on popular sites (a la greasemonkey) ?
There are so many options to optimize web browsing for such devices - this slowness web surfing MUST have come up in beta testing - what solutions are included?
Favorite part of the interview... (Score:2)
Mr. Jobs: We can report to you that it hasn't so far.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to add to this that Jobs has said that phones would eat into the iPod's sales either way, and he'd rather it's Apple's own phone that does it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is significant that iPod sales have not seemed to be negatively affected by the iPhone announcement.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure he was trying to be funny. There was a very real possibility that people would not buy an iPod in the last few months, because they knew the iPhone was on the way and it would make their iPod seem outdated. I know that for me, after seeing the iPhone demonstrated, iPods seem less exciting and cool.
Actually, Jobs said exactly that right after the next sentence in the quote. I just truncated it to make a joke. I even added a smiley at the end of my reply for the humor impaired here @ /. :rolleyes:
AT+T jsut boosted EDGA speeds (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/28/atandt-custome
As we know, increased means they probably removed some artificial cap....
I wonder how many days will go by until the drop the speed again? I guess there will be a halo effect of new iPhone buyers showing their friends - "hey look at this I can browse the web" - just for the sake of it....
Apple should have went with Verizon first. (Score:2, Flamebait)
Apple should have gone with Verizon Wireless, which would have given the iPhone the ability to access EVDO wireless networking that has data transfer rates in the 350 to 800 kilobits per second range. In that case, the iPhone would have actually been a truly useful device to access the Internet and corporate email systems.
Re: (Score:2)
taken out of context (Score:2, Informative)
must-go-faster-must-go-fastr (Score:2, Funny)
Inet calling? (Score:2)
This great new product! (Score:5, Funny)
I could have guessed this. (Score:2)
Same as 1.5 Mbps is enough for anyone. (Score:4, Insightful)
Mr. Stephenson: If you think about wireless broadband networks, EDGE is the only ubiquitous nationwide broadband network deployed today. It's a 300-plus kilobit type service. We're selling in the tens of thousands every single month of smart phones that operate on nothing but EDGE. The service experience is really, really good and what you're going to see with the iPhone is the caching technology that Steve and the Apple guys have developed here makes the EDGE experience even better. Between the Wi-Fi and the EDGE coverage, this is a really good experience.
High latency, low bandwidth broadband. Huzzah!
Sprint's EVDO network is deployed as widely as AT&T's EDGE network (not even all of AT&T's GSM network is EDGE). Worse, Sprint's EVDO revA network is deployed in most metropolitan areas, nearly all interstate highways, and nearly all tourist areas.
For AT&T, Edge is "all the speed you need", up until they deploy HSDPA, in which case that will be, "all the speed you need". Just like this: http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2006/03/30/att-proj
Mr.Stephenson said that AT&T's field tests have shown 'no discernable difference' between AT&T's 1.5 Mbps service and Comcast's 6 Mbps because the problem is not in the last mile but in the backbone.
Ridiculous
Rumors of a recent EDGE speed boost (Score:2)
http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/28/atandt-custome
No idea if this is true, but there are similar rumours coming from elsewhere as well.
My take on Apple's policy: (Score:2)
My initial reaction was that, come the European launch, if the iPhone doesn't have 3G/UMTS/HSPDA then it would be laughed out of court. However, on reflection, it sounds as if Apple's attitude is:
GPRS is good enough to check your EMAIL and gives good phone coverage. If you want a decent web-surfing experience on the train, subway or in a coffee shop, your best bet is if some bright spark has installed WiFi. So lets do a phone which makes a much better job of doing WiFi than the competition and not weigh i
This is a national conspiracy (Score:2)
Mary Cheney: Dad, you look so sad, it's Christmas! You should be happy! What's wrong??
Dick Cheney: Well Mary, I'm having a hard time holding things together. My boss is a halfwit, nobody understands me, the press is relentless, and things might come unravelled if people start asking for emails. On top of that Michael Moore is coming out with a film that could hurt all of our big pharma stocks. I don't know what to do. *sigh*
Mary Cheney: I have lots of connections in SanFrancisc
Opera Mini makes EDGE/GRPS faster by compression (Score:3, Informative)
Revising history? (Score:3, Informative)
That would be either "The Xerox Star Office System" in "1981" or at least "Lisa" in "1982", Steve.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like that, I suggest you find an interest in wood working.
600 now, 1000 for 3g (Score:2)
Re:oblig (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Here is a copy of the article (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice spin. I wish I had Wi-Fi networks wherever I roamed. My HTC Wizard has EDGE+WiFi, but I've never heard anyone claim "Whadda you want 3G for, you have Wi-Fi!"
Blah.
Re:Here is a copy of the article (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:oblig (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not really the bandwidth, it's the latency. T-Mobile's EDGE runs about 700-1000ms ping times for me. Sometimes better, sometimes worse. I generally get 60-80kbps, which isn't horrific. Hell, I've even watched YouTube videos on the EDGE network. Not something I'd do a lot, but it is doable.
If they could get the latency down, EDGE would be a lot less annoying.
Re:Halo (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless, of course, you're Verizon who had the balls to stand up to Apple. Right decision in the end or not, at least they stood up for their business.
If someone came to you and said:
1) We want you to agree to sell our product, sight unseen.
2) You have to cut all of your partners out of it.
3) We will tell you whether the phone can be replaced if a customer has a problem.
4) We want a percentage of service revenue.
- does that sound like a good business decision to you? You're going to alienate all of your other partners (i.e. Best buy, Walmart, etc..) You're going to alienate your customers (Sorry, we'd love to replace your handset Mr. Big-Important-VIP-Customer, but Apple said no. Can't help you.), and worst of all, you open the door for *EVERYONE* to take a piece of your service revenue - why wouldn't Motorola/LG/Samsung/etc. ask for the same deal? (You did it for Apple - either split revenue with us, or no RAZR2 for you.)
I agree - I think it would've kicked butt if VZW had the iPhone. A real 3G network (EV-DO) would complement iPhone wonderfully, as would a real voice network (GSM quality is crap. CDMA not only covers more area per tower, but it has a better vocoder as well.)
But can you blame them for turning it down? I would have, given the way Apple approached them.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-veri
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
5) Look at what we did for the music industry
Which means that Apple redefined the entire business. Any label that turned down Apple when they came calling about iPod/iTMS has either wised up and jumped on the bandwagon too late or had better spend the last few dollars they are about to make on shutters to cover their windows when they vacate their buidling.
The future is plain enough for anyone with vision to see. iPhone will be the new word for cell phone. 5 years from now when you walk into
Re:Halo (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh noes!! Please don't withhold the RAZR2 from us!! Our customers will die -- all three of them!!
Well OK, the RAZR sold more than three units. I assume. Anyway, the curent economic model between the cellphone manufacturers and service providers sucks. It leads to stupid shit like feature-blocking. I want my cellphone provider to provide service. And usable information about that service. My cable company didn't sell me a TV. My ISV didn't sell me my computer (and if they did I'll bet it wouldn't be one that I wanted.) Sure, I wish the iPhone was usable with all carriers, but it isn't. Yet. One step at a time.
Oh, and P.S. When the RAZR came out it cost $500 as well WITH a service agreement; $800 without. Just saying.
Re:Halo (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Turn's out the A990 requires a cable (not included) and you had to sync with Windows Media 10 and only uses WMA! Besides the fact I'm a linux user, this is just a step backwards. I thought we where passed the days of requiring special software to transfer songs to
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Revolutionary? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, my P990i does have a touchscreen, does view the web, does play music. That doesn't mean the iPhone's UI isn't revolutionary.